-
-
Well, that is not really abnormal. The Vikings sailed what is today called the Northwest Passage for almost 1,000 years from around 300AD to 1260AD when the first mention of ice blocking the passage is mentioned in Viking archives in Nuuk, Greenland. This is commonly called the "Medieval Warm Period". The AGW proponents (including the IPCC) have tried to discount historical fact, claiming this warm period was centered around Eastern Europe even though early Viking records clearly show the Arctic was totally ice-free for almost 1,000 years. And geological and ecological data from other places on the globe show that the earth was far warmer than it is today.
They have even tried to deny the fact that the Vikings were here in North America long before Columbus was even born - until irrefutable proof of an Early Viking settlement in Newfoundland was discovered a few years ago, dating to around 1000AD.
The problem is that some people refuse to accept anything different than that which they THINK they know. Helge Ingstad made a huge discovery that was written about in Viking archives, but that nobody had ever been able to track down. And this discovery, which has been extensively studied and further diggings made at the site in the last 10 years is now accepted as archeological fact. It put an unpleasant "twist" in the history books for some people because it turns out history was a little different than what they had been taught since childhood.
The global temp has only risen 1.53°F from 1880 to 2012. That is pretty minor in the big picture. The Arctic being ice-free, and Greenland being lush green with early Norse farming communities far in the north is not unprecedented. It is just facts that like to be ignored by some people who are intent on being alarmists, and want to believe that the way the earth has been for the last 500 years is the way it should be forever. So drawing a conclusion that man's activities has been responsible for the last 150 years does not account for the same thing happening 1,700 years ago. There were no aboriginal coal-fired powerplants back then. And yet the Arctic being ice-free today (which it's not yet) is considered disastrous?
Please explain to me exactly what the problem is being able to farm parts of Greenland again that are currently under ice sheets? It's clearly been done in the past.off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
Chris: this suspiciously sounds like a whole lotta revisionist history to me... and not the part about the Vikings landing on the North American continent. Everyone pretty much knows that, by now. The problem was that the knowledge of that discovery went nowhere: the rest of Europe was kept in the dark about it, partly because the Vikings lacked a written language except for a few rune sticks. Viking archives? Not sure, but the archives you refer to are probably from people writing down the oral histories called sagas in the last century, and were not written in 1000 AD. And where do you get this information about the "Northwest Passage" being open? That was just a legend, like the "Seven cities of Cibola" with streets of gold, or Montezuma's lost treasure. Let's hear some evidence about this beyond just a wild claim. What you're talking about is unknown in the general knowledge base of western civilization. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
The problem with it is that places like California, Texas the entire South (US) and probably a lot of the Midwest will then be so freakin' hot there'll be nothing left but a few lizards doing push-ups in the sun... The places that currently feed the entire US and a lot of the world. Likewise for anything that currently lies in the temperate zone: Argentina, South Africa, India, southern Europe, etc.
That, my friend is the problem with global warming.Comment
-
Might want to read this over. According to NASA and The UK Metoffice despite significant CO2 increases there has been no warming for 17 to 19 years.MSEE, PEComment
-
Not true. My wife is native Swedish and I'm second generation Norwegian-American and we are sailors. We have great interest in early Viking history and explorations and have been buffs all our lives.
The Swedish, Norwegian and Finn Vikings weren't "christianized" until around the 16th century, although some parts of Scandinavia had christian influence from Europe as early as the 8th century. The Viking expansion was VERY impressive. They were feared all over Europe to the point where the early christian church included a new litany, "From the fury of the Northmen, O' Lord deliver us."
The early Viking records were moved from Nidaros (now Trondheim) to Copenhagen in 1664. They were subsequently burned to the ground by the christians in 1728, thinking these early records of the Norse pagan were a "curse". It was thought the early records of the Vikings had been largely lost until 1903 when detailed written archives were discovered in Nuuk, Greenland detailing births and marriages, plus explorations and trading with a land called Vineland (what is today North America). The records from these early Viking settlements and explorations go back to around 300AD.
These explorations and so-called "legends" of the Vikings, long thought to be myth by modern scientists and historians were suddenly crashed. Even the Viking Sunstones they used for navigation in the high latitudes were thought to be myth until one was finally discovered in an ancient shipwreck off the coast of the Channel Islands only a year ago:
Early Vikings landed on the southern shores of Lake Superior, coming from the north from Hudson Bay in 1362. They left Runestones (just because Runes are not modern language does not mean it is not detailed) in Minnesota, Northern Wisconsin and one found near Hudson Bay. One of them found in Minnesota in 1898 states on it:
Eight Götalanders and 22 Northmen on this acquisition journey from Vinland far to the west. We had a camp by two shelters one day's journey north from this stone. We were fishing one day. After we came home, found 10 men red from blood and dead. Ave Maria save from evil.
(side of stone) There are 10 men by the inland sea to look after our ships fourteen days journey from this peninsula. Year 1362
There has since been found many artifacts in the Canadian Archipelago where early Vikings traded with Intuits and other natives there from as early as 300AD (as far back as the records go).
Even Weather Underground, staffed by big time AGW cheerleaders, now has to recognize that the Vikings sailed the Northwest Passage due to irrefutable archeological evidence found in the area:
The Northwest passage may have been open at some period during the Medieval Warm Period, between 1000 and 1300 AD. A better candidate for the last previous opening was the period 6,000 - 8,500 years ago, when the Earth's orbital variations brought more sunlight to the Arctic in summer than at present. Funder and Kjaer (2007) found extensive systems of wave generated beach ridges along the North Greenland coast that suggested the Arctic Ocean was ice-free in the summer for over 1,000 years during that period. Prior to that, the next likely time was during the last inter-glacial period, 120,000 years ago
Ref: http://www.wunderground.com/climate/...rnPassages.asp
It is not "revisionist history" but Viking history. And it is totally fascinating for my wife and I because these people were our ancestors and were accomplished sailors on some of the most inhospitable oceans on earth for over a thousand years before Europeans dared venture out. Most of history as it is taught today is recorded and taught from the christian viewpoint, and the christians went to great lengths to wipe out the "pagans". But it doesn't make the explorations, sailing prowess, and abilities of the early Vikings any less impressive when you dig beyond contemporary history books and study it. The christian viewpoint is still pushed today as the "one and only" true account. But it is not.off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
There is still significant disagreement among scholars as to the authenticity of some if not all of the runestone finds.
One problem is that techniques for dating carved stones are not as advanced as techniques (primarily Carbon 12) for dating paper and other organic writing means.SunnyBoy 3000 US, 18 BP Solar 175B panels.Comment
-
Well, part of the disagreement stems from the fact that the early Norse Vikings are largely considered raiding pagans from the christian viewpoint on history. And the christian viewpoint is what has tended to be the one that is taught. Re-writing the history books is not acceptable to many scholars, especially from universities associated with churches or particular denominations.
Much the same thing has happened to the American Indians in the teaching of history as it is. In most history books detailing conflict between European settlers and Native Americans the Indians are portrayed as the "bad guys" and the white people the "good guys". In reality, the Indians were some of the most advanced conservationists on earth with a very rich culture, and they were simply trying to defend their homeland.
The christian religion (along with many others) has forced many narrow-minded and oftentimes inaccurate depictions of history (and science). It is one of those deals where fact, discovery and common sense many times are overruled by beliefs.off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
I'm trying to wrap my head around why this would be so bad. I mean where there's deserts, there's been deserts for thousands of years. And most the Southwestern US is what is called the "Desert Southwest". The only reason crops grow there now is because humans have sucked the aquifers dry trying to irrigate it. We all know this don't work long term anyway because the water runs out.
But say, South Dakota, Minnesota or Iowa becomes warmer with time. How could this be so bad? Ever been to South Dakota in the winter time? It ain't good baby. Warmer conditions means a longer growing season. If you've ever been to Central or South America it becomes quickly evident that plants LOVE heat. The plants there, and the life teeming in the jungles, is quite impressive. The plants get so big that they create their own micro-climate where it rains every day. And they need literally tons of CO2 to do it.
There is much evidence that these conditions have existed in the far north in the past. And it has been very good for everything that lives. And when it happened there is no record that the temperate zone became full of lizards in the sun in the middle of a desert. So what is the problem? It's nobody's fault but man's himself for trying to create an oasis in the desert in Texas and southern California, etc.. That was stupid in the first place and it would be good for Mother Nature to teach him who's boss here.
But - the evidence suggests this won't happen anyway - at least not anytime soon. The temperature rise that everybody is so worried about stopped over a decade ago - even the latest IPCC report acknowledges this. They call it a "hiatus" and insist she'll be picking up Real Soon Now.
Did it ever occur to you that you are not reciting actual facts in the above quoted statement, but instead are participating in the alarmist predictions?off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
Chris there is not a lot of desert in TX, well not by TX sizes anyway. It is called Chihauhuan Desert that encompasses El Paso area. Texas has 5 climate zone ranging from Desert in the west, High Plains in the Panhandle, Sub Tropics on the coast, Hill Country in the central region, and Pine forest in the east.
But I knew what you meant.
MSEE, PEComment
-
If you don't want to consider Runestones, you can go to the ancient Intuit ruins all thru the Canadian Arctic Archipelago and find Viking artifacts they traded with the Intuits. The voyage of Bjarni Herjólfsson on the Arctic Ocean to the western islands in Nunavut in 985 is pretty well documented.
You can try to dispute it, but the Arctic was ice free for many hundreds of years in recorded history. And AGW certainly didn't cause it. So let's say it happens today - what's the big deal? It's happened before so it's probably normal. And I'm going to say that since it happened before, and it was a long term thing that humans had nothing to with then - it is highly likely that humans have nothing to do with it now (assuming it even happens again).
This whole AGW scam has gotten so bad that we can't even have a wildfire in a western state anymore without it being blamed on AGW. Or a weather event. Remember last winter? The dreaded polar vortex that made the news that froze the whole freaking United States' balls off? In the old days that was called a "cold snap". It was blamed on AGW this time - they tried to claim global warming weakened some mysterious barrier that keeps the cold up at the North Pole and it got out. And this is no sh!t:
You know - the North Pole - the place where it's really warm and all the ice is melting there? Yeah. There. That place. It takes some really gullible people to fall for that one.
Oh. Forgot to add that I Been There, Done That, Got the T-shirt:
off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
well there are 4 times more wildfires per year than 20 years ago. Trees weakened by drought falling prey to pine mtn beetles and other parasites creating a dangerous fire situation, reservoirs all over California at record low levels. An article I was reading said they figured this was the worst drought in 800 years, judging by tree ring analysis.
How about you prove our human caused increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is not a contributing cause to this?
But let's get back to what you guys seem to doubt about the general (99%) scientific take on the AGW (whatever that stands for, I assume <something> Global Warming)
What is it, you don't understand how certain gases act to retain heat in the atmosphere?
And how they got there? Funny how you guys love to quote the science of solar panels, and a well designed system, but when that same science tells you something that may be a little uncomfortable to hear, or "threatens our lifestyle" as Fox News would put it, you act like it's some Liberal agenda. It's what any sane individual would do when he doesn't know the outcome of an action like the CO2 increase we've caused. Maybe the system will find a new equilibrium, but initial indications are that we're screwing it up, and it's getting worse.
If anything, being cautious with the environment is the conservative thing to do! Conservative: doing that which conserves the present conditions- Conservative: damn near the same thing as "conservation." Hello. Not just blindly swallowing the dogma shoveled out by those who have chosen to cast this as a political issue.Comment
Tweet
Comment